(PC) Mitchell v. Pickett et al, No. 2:2017cv01159 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 4/11/2018 ADOPTING 13 Findings and Recommendations in full, DISMISSING Plaintiffs request for an injunction in claim one against defendants Pickett and Griffith, DISMISSING Defendant Pickett from this action, DISMISSING Plaintiffs request for an injunction in claim two against defendants Griffith and Doe and DENYING 11 Motion for Reconsideration. (Hunt, G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Mitchell v. Pickett et al Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COREY MITCHELL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:17-cv-1159 JAM DB P v. ORDER J. PICKETT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis under 42 U.S.C. § 17 18 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 19 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On January 26, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff has 23 not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 26, 2018, are adopted in full; and 3 2. Plaintiff’s request for an injunction in claim one against defendants Pickett and Griffith 4 is dismissed; 5 3. Defendant Pickett is dismissed from this action; 6 4. Plaintiff’s request for an injunction in claim two against defendants Griffith and Doe is 7 dismissed; 8 9 5. Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief contained in his complaint (ECF No. 1) is denied; and 10 11 12 6. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 11) is denied. DATED: April 11, 2018 13 /s/ John A. Mendez_________________ 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
